Agenda item

(a)  Notes of Scrutiny Visits

 It was commented that the visits had been useful and it was particularly valuable to speak with pupils about their experiences.

(b)  Concluding Discussion

The Committee had a concluding discussion on the evidence received through the Alternative Provision scrutiny. The following main points were noted in the discussion:

·         The Committee considered which pupils should be in alternative provision and if alternative provision was being utilised properly. It was commented that although some provisions provided niche education to pupils with a particular set of needs, there was a concern that some schools were too ready to take pupils out of mainstream education and refer them to provisions with an insufficient focus on academic attainment.

·         It was suggested that increasing the involvement of schools in the referral process would introduce an element of peer review. It was thought that this could reduce the number of pupils referred to alternative provision.

·         Members noted that schools were responsible for referring pupils to alternative provision and did not have to make use of the council’s service. It was queried how schools could be incentivised to keep low performing and disruptive pupils in mainstream education.

·         The Committee considered the evidence that several alternative provision pupils had learning needs identified after referral and suggested that a standardised and comprehensive method of assessment was required to identify the needs of pupils. It was noted that this would also assist in improving the quality of data held by the council. Officers commented that the council would not be able to specify the type of assessments carried out by all providers and there was not sufficient resources for the council to carry out such assessments in-house. Members suggested that such referrals could be carried out by schools prior to referral.

·         Members considered the appropriateness of functional skills qualifications and the availability of GCSEs to alternative provision pupils. It was thought that some providers excessively focused on pupil expectations as opposed to aspirations and this could be to the detriment of some pupils. A discussion was had on if the purpose of alternative provision was to provide alternative qualifications or to provide mainstream qualifications in an alternative setting. It was concluded that functional skills were generally not as valued as GCSEs and that all pupils should have the opportunity to study for GCSEs. It was suggested that the council should set the target of all children achieving at least a Grade C in GCSE English and Maths.

·         The Committee noted the vulnerabilities of alternative provision pupils. It was commented that some pupils required mentoring and emotional support, some required educational support due to their learning needs, and others would benefit from programmes to inspire them and raise their aspirations. It was commented that some pupils did not appreciate the importance of education and further work was required to help these pupils identify appropriate pathways. Targeted interventions such as the ‘Achievement for All’ project were considered to be best practice.

·         Members considered the role of early help services and the importance of the whole-family approach. Engaging parents in their child’s education was thought to be key to improving outcomes.

·         It was suggested that some alternative provision providers were experts in behaviour management and could provide training to teachers on the most effective ways to work with challenging pupils. 

·         The Committee expressed some concern that the majority of referrals were made at the time when pupils were considering their GCSE options and queried if predicted GCSE results was a factor in some referrals. Officers advised that referrals were usually made at this time for practical reasons and pupils should remain in mainstream education unless exceptional circumstances required referral to alternative provision. Schools should not consider predicted GCSE results as a factor in referrals.

·         A member of the public queried if the Committee’s review was consistent with the council’s stated objective to reduce the number of pupils referred to alternative provision. In response, it was clarified that the committee did not support the deletion of alternative provision and the review was seeking to both make alternative provision more effective and reduce the demand for alternative provision.

·         It was queried if the council could incentivise schools to retain pupils by delegating the budget for alternative provision referrals to schools. In response, it was noted that schools already paid the full cost of alternative provision for Year 10 students and the council only paid a supplement towards Year 11 pupils.

·         The Committee considered that schools required a more positive attitude to alternative provision. Alternative provision should not be used as a threat, otherwise pupils considered that they were a failure as a result of their referral. It was thought that alternative provision should instead be considered as a fresh start.

·         Following a query on providing information to parents, it was advised that parents received a report on their child’s progress every half term. It was noted that the response from parents to alternative provision was mixed.

·         Members considered if it was appropriate to provide alternative provision pupils with a route back to mainstream education. As alternative provision was only used for Key Stage 4 pupils in Islington, it was thought that referral back to mainstream school could disrupt the pupil’s studies for GCSEs or other qualifications, particularly if their school and alternative provision provider offered differing qualifications or was working to different syllabuses. However, it was suggested that those who were persistently absent from alternative provision should be referred back to their mainstream school.

·         It was suggested that pupils attending provisions which did not offer GCSEs could be offered an opportunity to study for GCSEs at their mainstream school either after school or one day a week.

·         The Committee considered the innovate approaches of alternative provision providers, including banning certain items from lunches, focusing on exercise and health as a means of improving behaviour and pupil wellbeing, implementing strict boundaries for pupils that need them, and providing emotional support through non-teaching staff.

·         A member of the public commented on the importance of life-long learning and noted that GCSEs were able to be obtained post-16 if pupils studied functional skills qualifications at Key Stage 4.